[Note:] The bill brought "mound system" private sewage systems under the state plumbing code prumulgated by DILHR. A narrow exception, subject to specified standards, covered private mound systems in Wisconsin areas with bedrock greater than 550 million years in age.
A.Amdt-2 broadened the exception to apply also to sites within 75 miles of the bedrock areas.
A.Amdt-3 deleted the exception's limitation to the bedrock areas.
Point of order:
Representative Seery rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 3 to Assembly Bill 867 was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f).
The chair [Rep. Clarenbach, speaker pro tem] ruled the point of order well taken.
Assembly Journal of February 27, 1992 .......... Page: 876
Point of order:
182 Representative Seery rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 867 [relating to siting standards for mound private sewage systems and granting rule-making authority] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f).
[Note:] The bill brought "mound system" private sewage systems under the state plumbing code promulgated by DILHR. A narrow exception, subject to specified standards, covered private mound systems in Wisconsin areas with bedrock greater than 550 million years in age.
A.Sub.Amdt-1 broadened the scope of the proposal by deleting the general regulation of private mound sewage systems and the exception's limitation to certain bedrock areas, keeping only the specified standards proposed by the legislature.
The chair [Rep. Clarenbach, speaker pro tem] ruled the point of order well taken.
Assembly Journal of February 11, 1992 .......... Page: 810
Point of order:
Representative Huber rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 452 [relating to worthless checks made to fermented malt beverages dealers] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f).
[Note:] The amendment expanded the scope of the proposal by making the penalty apply to all insufficient checks given for past consideration, including payroll checks.
The chair [Rep. Clarenbach, speaker pro tem] ruled the point of order well taken.
Assembly Journal of January 30, 1992 .......... Page: 761
Point of order:
Representative Prosser rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 1 to assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 590 [relating to a state energy policy and granting rule-making authority] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f). The chair took the point of order under advisement.
[Note:] As shown by A.Sub.Amdt-1, 1991 AB 590 required state agencies to establish energy conservation objectives guiding their operations.
A.Amdt-1 to the substitute attempted to expand the scope of the proposal by applying the conservation guidelines not only to energy demands created by a state agency but also to energy demands regulated by a state agency - thus covering also all private use in Wisconsin of any form of energy regulated by the public service commission or any other state agency.
Assembly Journal of January 30, 1992 .......... Page: 762
Ruling of the chair:
183 The speaker [Speaker Kunicki] ruled well taken the point of order raised by Representative Prosser that assembly amendment 1 to assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 590 was not germane.
Assembly Journal of November 5, 1991 .......... Page: 642
Point of order:
Representative Linton rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 547 [relating to special distinguishing registration plates for veterans of the attack on Pearl Harbor] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f).
[Note:] The bill proposed to add a single class - veterans of the attack on Pearl Harbor - to the more than 50 classes already listed in the printed 1989 statutes as qualified for identification on personalized motor vehicle license plates.
A.Sub.Amdt-1 expanded the scope of the proposal by listing another 23 incidents in World War II, Korea and Vietnam for identification on personalized plates.
The chair [Rep. Clarenbach, speaker pro tem] ruled the point of order well taken.
Assembly Journal of July 3, 1991 .......... Page: 379
Point of order:
Representative Welch rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 9 to Assembly Bill 485 [relating to providing that the Wisconsin housing and economic development authority may issue bonds and notes for loans to finance construction, renovation and development of property to be used primarily as a sports and entertainment home stadium; providing a property tax exemption and sales tax exemptions related to certain stadiums; the administrative costs of the county sales tax; and an income and franchise tax exemption] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f).
The chair [Rep. Clarenbach, speaker pro tem] ruled the point of order not well taken.
184 [Note:] 1991 AB 485 allowed WHEDA financing of a loan not exceeding $35 million for the purpose of building a new home stadium for the Milwaukee Brewers baseball team. To stimulate investment in sky boxes or private luxury boxes at the stadium, the bill excluded the cost of general admission tickets for box lease holders from the definition of "gross receipts" subject to the sales tax, even though admissions to athletic events are taxed.
A.Amdt-9 not only deleted the special exemption for box lease holders, but included the cost of the lease in the sale of admissions to athletic events subject to the general sales tax. That change in policy was held to not constitute a substantial expansion of the scope of the proposal.
On the other hand, when A.Amdt-1 to A.Amdt-11 proposed to change the name of the minor league Beloit Brewers to the south central Wisconsin Brewers
in addition to the change, required by A.Amdt-11, from Milwaukee to Wisconsin Brewers in exchange for the state's financial aid with the stadium, the Beloit change was ruled a substantial expansion of the scope of A.Amdt-11.
Assembly Journal of July 3, 1991 .......... Page: 380
Point of order:
Representative Robson rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 1 to assembly amendment 11 to Assembly Bill 485 was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f).
The chair ruled the point of order well taken.
Assembly Journal of July 3, 1991 .......... Page: 371
Point of order:
Representative Van Dreel rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Joint Resolution 70 [relating to designating the Fox River-Lake Winnebago national heritage corridor] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f). The chair took the point of order under advisement.
[Note:] The original joint resolution was limited to the Fox river from Green Bay to Portage. A.Sub.Amdt-1 attempted to expand the proposed national heritage corridor to include the Wisconsin river from Portage to Prairie du Chien.
Assembly Journal of July 3, 1991 .......... Page: 377
Ruling of the chair:
The chair [Rep. Clarenbach, speaker pro tem] ruled well taken the point of order raised by Representative Van Dreel that assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Joint Resolution 70 was not germane.
Assembly Journal of July 2, 1991 .......... Page: 367
Point of order:
Representative Bell rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 20 to Assembly Bill 484 [relating to imposing fiscal restraints on local units of government] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f).
[Note:] As introduced, 1991 AB 484 imposed spending limits on school districts and levy limits on towns, villages, cities, counties and special purpose districts. The limits were tied to the average percentage increase in the consumer price index in the preceding calendar year.
A.Amdt-20 attempted to expand the scope of the proposal by applying the same limit to general purpose revenue expenditures "for state operations" excluding principal repayment and interest, expenditures funded by gifts or grants, and aids to individuals, organizations and local units of government.
The chair [Rep. Clarenbach, speaker pro tem] ruled the point of order well taken.
185Assembly Journal of July 1, 1991 .......... Page: 356
Point of order:
Representative Krug rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 2 to Assembly Bill 388 [relating to limits on wrongful death actions for loss of society and companionship] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f).
[Note:] As introduced, 1991 AB 388 removed the $50,000 ceiling on awards for loss of society and companionship in wrongful death actions under section 895.04 of the statutes.
A.Amdt-2 to the bill reinserted the ceiling with the amount increased to $100,000, and then attempted a substantial expansion of the proposal by including under the wrongful death award ceiling of section 895.04 any "medical malpractice actions commenced under ch. 655" of the statutes.
The chair [Rep. Clarenbach, speaker pro tem] ruled the point of order well taken.
Assembly Journal of April 17, 1991 .......... Page: 172
Point of order:
Representative Robson rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 3 to Assembly Bill 120 [relating to notifying the department of public instruction if a school district employe licensed by the department engages in conduct that endangers any pupil] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f).
[Note:] The original bill directed the school district administrator to notify the state superintendent if any person who is employed by the school district and licensed by DPI is suspended or dismissed, or resigns or takes a
leave of absence, for reasons the administrator believes relate to the employe's engaging in conduct that endangered the health, safety, welfare or education of any pupil. The bill also provided immunity from civil liability for persons who in good faith notify or fail to notify the state superintendent.
A.Sub.Amdt-3 to 1991 AB 120 expanded the scope of the proposal by applying the procedure to all employes of cooperative educational service agencies, state schools and state institutions for minors, of all public schools and of any private school under a "school choice" contract with the Milwaukee school district.
The chair [Rep. Clarenbach, speaker pro tem] ruled the point of order well taken.
Assembly Journal of April 17, 1991 .......... Page: 171
Point of order:
Representative Hubler rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 2 to Assembly Bill 19 [relating to basic local exchange service offered by large telecommunications utilities] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f). The chair took the point of order under advisement.
186 [Note:] The original bill, affecting only GTE and Wisconsin Bell, required phone companies with more than 100,000 access lines in use ("large telecommunication utilities") to offer residential customers a flat-rate local exchange telephone service at a cost not exceeding the charge for 200 calls/month at the lowest cost measured rate service option.
A.Sub.Amdt-2 to 1991 AB 19 applied to all telecommunications utilities operating in Wisconsin, substantially expanding the scope of the proposal.
A.Sub.Amdt-3 to 1991 AB 19, although it contained additional regulatory detail, was again limited to large telecommunications utilities and held germane under A.Rule 54 (4) (d) [particularized detail].
Assembly Journal of May 16, 1991 .......... Page: 237
Ruling of the chair:
The speaker [Speaker Kunicki] ruled well taken the point of order raised by Representative Hubler on Wednesday, April 17, that assembly substitute amendment 2 to Assembly Bill 19 was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f).
Assembly Journal of May 16, 1991 .......... Page: 237
Point of order:
Representative Prosser rose to the point of order that assembly substitute amendment 3 to Assembly Bill 19 was not germane under Assembly Rule 54 (3) (f).
The speaker [Speaker Kunicki] ruled the point of order not well taken.
Assembly Journal of March 12, 1991 .......... Page: 110
Point of order:
Representative Krug rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 1 to assembly substitute amendment 1 to Assembly Bill 5, January 1991 Spec.Sess., [relating to dangerous weapons and providing penalties] was not germane under Assembly Rule 54.
The chair [Rep. Clarenbach, speaker pro tem] ruled the point of order well taken.
187 [Note:] The original bill eliminated the court's discretion to substitute probation for the statutory minimum sentences for crimes committed while using or threatening the use of a dangerous weapon, resulting in mandatory minimum imprisonment, and provided for a minimum imprisonment on conviction for misdemeanors involving a dangerous weapon.
A.Sub.Amdt-1 accomplished the same purpose as the proposal by making more specific the conditions for mandatory imprisonment, and by limiting to certain specified conditions the court's discretion to substitute probation.
A.Amdt-1 to A.Sub.Amdt-1 attempted to expand the proposal by applying mandatory minimum sentences not only to offenses involving dangerous weapons, but also to crimes and misdemeanors committed with the help of a motor vehicle operated after revocation or suspension of the defendant's drivers license. An amendment that substantially expands the scope of the proposal is not germane; A.Rule 54 (3) (f).
A.Sub.Amdt-4 further refined the conditions for mandatory imprisonment and continued the limited court discretion for substituting probation.
A.Amdt-2 to A.Sub.Amdt-4, requiring notification of all victims in case probation was substituted, attempted to address a different individual proposition; A.Rule 54 (3) (a).
A.Amdt-3 to A.Sub.Amdt-4, a hand-written floor amendment requiring the court to publish its reasons in each case of substituting probation for mandatory minimum incarceration "in the county newspaper of record", might have been considered frivolous and inadmissible under A.Rule 54 (2).
Point of order:
Representative Travis rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 2 to assembly substitute amendment 4 to Assembly Bill 5, January 1991 Spec.Sess., was not germane under Assembly Rule 54.
The chair ruled the point of order well taken.
Point of order:
Representative Travis rose to the point of order that assembly amendment 3 to assembly substitute amendment 4 to Assembly Bill 5, January 1991 Spec.Sess., was not germane under Assembly Rule 54.
The chair ruled the point of order well taken.
1 9 9 1 S E N A T E
Senate Journal of June 2, 1992 .......... Page: 1006
[Point of order:]
Senator Van Sistine raised the point of order that Senate amendment 1 [to Assembly Bill 6, April 1992 Spec.Sess., relating to restricting gambling conducted by the state to the forms of gambling that the state is currently conducting, creating a council on charitable gaming, and the forms of gambling that may be conducted by Indians on tribal lands] was not germane.
[Note:] The purpose of the bill was limited to defining the types of gambling permitted in this state as part of the "state lottery" and to enumerate the types of gambling that remained prohibited.
S.Amdt-1, which was adopted (rejection had failed 13 to 20) and enacted as part of 1991 WisAct 321, restricts the legislature's law-making power by prohibiting the consideration by either house of any bill to legalize one of the prohibited forms of gambling unless: 1) the legislature first enacts a bill for a statewide advisory referendum on that form of gambling; and 2) the people, by voting on the question, authorize legislative consideration of legalizing that form of gambling.
For a contrary ruling, see Ably.Jour. of 5/5/92 at p. 1175.
The Chair [President Risser] ruled the point not well taken.
Senate Journal of March 25, 1992 .......... Page: 795
[Point of order:]
188 Senator Van Sistine raised the point of order that Senate amendment 13 to Senate substitute amendment 2 to Senate Bill 308 [relating to the alcohol concentration of vehicle operators] is not germane.
[Note:] 1991 Senate Bill 308 proposed to establish 2 levels of "prohibited alcohol concentration" for motor vehicle operators: for a first or 2nd offense,
retain the existing .10% level, but for any 3rd or subsequent offense, anything over .08% would be evidence of drunkenness.
S.Amdt-13 was a floor amendment that tried to change the threshold after the first offense during a 10-year period, but that managed to wipe out the .10% threshold for a first offense and appeared to require a person to maintain a blood alcohol concentration of .08% or more "for a period of 10 years after the first offense" to demonstrate a prohibited alcohol concentration.
Even if S.Amdt-13 had been properly drafted, its adoption would have been a nongermane expansion of the scope of the proposal because the number of persons who may commit a 2nd drunk driving offense is greater than the number of persons who may commit a 3rd or subsequent drunk driving offense.
